Pouring Rights are the exclusive rights of a beverage company and/or distributor to have its products sold and advertised at a particular venue, event, or institution. UC Berkeley's PepsiCo Pouring Rights Contract means that PepsiCo’s company products are the only products sold, served, distributed, sampled, or otherwise made available on campus with few permitted exceptions: PepsiCo will allow “Local Competitive Products” as long as they do not take up more than 20% of the total beverage shelf space in any outlet on campus and are matched with a corresponding product of PepsiCo. This monopolization of products restricts our community’s agency over what we choose to purchase and whether we want to financially support a corporation that is not in line with our values.
 
PepsiCo is currently dominating the majority of UC Berkeley campus spaces, including the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics, ASUC facilities such as the MLK Jr. Student Union and Cesar Chavez Student Center, Residential and Student Service Programs, Cal Dining, campus markets, residence halls, and the Recreational Sports Facility. Under our Pouring Rights contract, PepsiCo also occupies and controls key student experiences, such as Caltopia and Calapalooza through extensive marketing.

Through Pouring Rights, UC Berkeley allows PepsiCo to privatize our public education system. Accepting funds from this private corporation in exchange for its mandatory presence on campus leaves members of the UC Berkeley community without any jurisdiction over their campus surroundings when it comes to food and beverages. Pouring Rights undermine the integrity of our education system by exposing the community to unhealthy products, using unsolicited and targeted advertising, and promoting businesses that fail to represent our community’s values of health, equity, and sustainability.
 
UC Berkeley should work to support both our health and our education to the highest level. By partnering with PepsiCo, UC Berkeley threatens the well-being of our community. PepsiCo’s practices—which are largely unsustainable, unhealthy, and unethical—go directly against our community values and the very standards that UC Berkeley strives to uphold.

1. Low-income people and people of color are disproportionately affected by PepsiCo as a result of existing food insecurity issues and PepsiCo’s targeted marketing. PepsiCo does not provide nutritious products for students who are unable to afford healthier alternatives, exacerbating the existing issue of food insecurity at UC Berkeley. Their dominance on campus is a barrier to making more nutritious, affordable options available to students. Furthermore, although PepsiCo states that they no longer target children in their advertisements, several loopholes in their policy permit this to continue. Children today—especially those from communities of color—are flooded with the company’s advertisements. Through these actions, PepsiCo has demonstrated little to no interest in the health of marginalized and vulnerable populations
(http://uconnruddcenter.org/files/Pdfs/TargetedMarketingReport2019.pdf, https://fortune.com/2016/02/19/soda-emerging-nations-sales/).

2. Under the current contract, UC Berkeley prioritizes a multinational corporation over the local producers they claim to support. This is evident in the ASUC Student Union where, despite claiming to uplift small local businesses by granting them access to the larger UC Berkeley community, PepsiCo products are still required to be sold. Due to PepsiCo’s low prices, more consumers are attracted to their products and therefore vital financial support is diverted away from the small businesses that contribute to our local economy and food system.

3. PepsiCo’s practices are detrimental to the global community, due to its discriminatory selection of employees, exploitation of natural resources, and unethical waste disposal methods. Evidence of this includes:

a. PepsiCo has long partnered with IndoFood palm oil plantations, which utilize child labor and expose workers to harmful pesticides. PepsiCo did not cut this tie until July 2019, demonstrating their prioritization of profits over human wellbeing
(https://www.ran.org/wp-content/uploads/rainforestactionnetwork/pages/15889/attachments/original/1467043668/The_Human_Cost_of_Conflict_Palm_Oil_RAN.pdf?1467043668).

b. PepsiCo has contributed to the deforestation of nearly 25,000 acres of Indonesian rainforest for palm oil plantations
(https://www.ran.org/leuser-watch/spsii/).

c. In 2012, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission conducted an investigation that revealed PepsiCo’s racially discriminatory hiring practices. At that time, about 300 African Americans were negatively affected when Pepsi enforced a new criminal background check policy, which is in direct violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist.cfm, https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm).

d. PepsiCo also exploits vulnerable populations in their marketing strategies. Due to declining sales in the United States, PepsiCo has begun to target the Global South with advertising and marketing strategies. Promoting sugary drinks and unhealthy foods in these countries brings deadly, diet-related disease to places that already struggle with providing health services to their citizens
(https://fortune.com/2016/02/19/soda-emerging-nations-sales/).

4. Our PepsiCo partnership undermines UC Berkeley’s sustainability goals. PepsiCo utilizes excessive quantities of plastics in their individual packaging as well as their packaging for product transportation. Therefore, our contract is an immediate roadblock to UC Berkeley’s goal of Zero Waste. Partnering with a large corporation also necessitates increased transportation, and therefore generates substantial greenhouse gas emissions as compared to locally sourced products. Remaining in this partnership would undermine UC Berkeley’s pledge to become a carbon-neutral campus by 2025 (https://ucop.edu/carbon-neutrality-initiative/index.html).

5. The PepsiCo contract eliminates our autonomy over our own decisions. If we terminate Pouring Rights, we can still purchase products from whichever vendors we choose, but we will not be bound to only PepsiCo.

Our campus can demonstrate its commitment to sustainability, social justice, and the local and global community! We, as members of the UC Berkeley community, demand that our University upholds its commitment to promoting environmental sustainability and human ethics by ending this contract with PepsiCo indefinitely, refraining from seeking another that is similar in nature, and increasing student participation and transparency in future contract negotiations. The current contract is a corrupt mechanism to lock us into a deal that does not reflect our campus vision. The contract expires on July 31st, 2023, but the deadline to renew is rapidly approaching. Now is the time to enact change.

Sign the petition against Pouring Rights at UC Berkeley.